Mr. Speaker, first the U.S. slapped protectionist buy American provisions into the American jobs act. Now the Conservatives claim to be “monitoring the situation” while the U.S. moves forward with a punitive $140 tariff on goods coming through B.C. ports. Seventy-five billion dollars worth of annual trade and 130,000 jobs are at stake.

Ed FastMinister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

Mr. Speaker, I would encourage that member to visit my part of the country to see what is actually going on there.

While the member opposite engages in unhelpful rhetoric, both my parliamentary secretary as well as the chairman of the international trade committee are on the ground in Washington, D.C. today raising this very issue with their counterparts.

Unlike the member opposite, we will continue to promote Canada's competitive advantage and aggressively pursue the elimination of trade barriers.

Ed FastMinister of International Trade and Minister for the Asia-Pacific Gateway

Mr. Speaker, on May 2 Canadians gave the government a very strong mandate to focus on economic growth and the creation of jobs. Our focus is on removing trade barriers, not erecting new ones. I wish the member would join us as we stand up for Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, the government did not get a mandate to give away our sovereignty. Canadians do not agree with that.

According to reports, Canadian officials are heading to Washington this weekend to beg for the U.S. government to hold a public signing ceremony for the deal. The Conservatives cannot even negotiate a signing ceremony, but claim they can negotiate a good deal for Canadians.

Concerns have been raised repeatedly about protecting the privacy of Canadians and also the thickening of our border, yet the government is more worried about a photo op with Barack Obama. Why will the government not come clean on its secret security deal?

It is committed to working with our American partners, with the Obama administration, to make it easier for jobs and employment growth. Reports that are in the media about a deal being accomplished are inaccurate.

Work on this important action plan is ongoing. When a final deal is reached, we will be sure to let the member for Toronto Centre know.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister works harder for the interests of his American friends than for those of Canadian families. We learned today that the perimeter security deal between Canada and the U.S. will cost $1 billion. Once again, this deal is not in the interest of Canadians. The government plans to use money cut from other programs to finance this deal.

Why does the Prime Minister want to pay for a deal that will benefit only the U.S. while cutting services offered here in Canada?

Mr. Speaker, no such deal has been signed with the Obama administration. The negotiations for the agreement are still ongoing. The NDP member has not seen the agreement, yet he is already against it.

We are pleased that the New Democratic Party has a renewed sense of keen interest in trade with the United States. We think that is great progress. We want to encourage the NDP to support even more free trade, not just with the United States but with countries right around the world.

Mr. Speaker, based on the report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, it is clear that the government is failing on climate change.

The government has lowered expected climate change reductions by 90% since 2007. If the minister believes that we are seeing the impacts of climate change, then why is the government failing so miserably on combating climate change?

Mr. Speaker, the commissioner knows, as my colleague should, that the Kyoto protocol, which was one of the greatest blunders of the previous Liberal government, was in Canada's rear view mirror.

The commissioner recognized yesterday that Canada has new international commitments to the Cancun agreements and the Copenhagen accord. We do have a climate change plan. I am delighted that the commissioner recognizes it.

The government is making cuts to areas such as climate impacts and adaptation, environmental assessment, and ozone monitoring. We do not expect these to be the last. The government is also cutting air quality measurements necessary for monitoring the oil sands.

How can the government deliver a comprehensive oil sands monitoring system when there will be fewer scientists to monitor it?

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to compare, any day, our government's record on the environment with that of the previous Liberal government, which did nothing but pay lip service to its professed commitment to the environment.

I would remind the member again, and I am disappointed that my colleague fails to recognize, the commissioner's positive words when he says, with regard to oil sands monitoring:

--the federal government has taken an important step forward by both acknowledging the deficiencies of the current system and setting out a detailed plan to fix them.

Mr. Speaker, today we learned that the mayor of Huntsville is embarrassed about the emails that he sent on the G8 legacy fund. Unfortunately, he is mostly embarrassed they left a paper trail leading right to the current President of the Treasury Board, documenting his abuse of power.

Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is deluded. He seems to think that he can dismantle a $6 billion a year corporation like the Canadian Wheat Board without significant closing costs, even though KPMG predicts $500 million in shutdown fees. He also thinks he can turn the complete grain marketing regime of the whole prairie economy on its head by August 1 and not disrupt the Prairies and the agrifood industry in the prairie region.

How could he be so deluded? I am seriously concerned that he might be taking a lead from the ostriches that he raises and he has his head in the sand about the reality--